Explanations of Vote delivered by India on resolutions during the 2015 UNGA First Committee

L.2:   The risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East

India has abstained on L.2 as a whole, and has voted against its PP 5 and 6, as we believe that the focus of this resolution should be limited to the region that it intends to address.

India’s position on the NPT is well known. The 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which codified the prevailing customary international law, provides that States are bound by a treaty based on the principle of free consent. The call to those States remaining outside the NPT to accede to it and to accept IAEA safeguards on all their nuclear activities is at variance with this principle and does not reflect current realities. India is not a Party to the NPT and is not bound by its outcome documents. This applies also to certain operative paragraphs contained in L2.

L.13 Rev 1 "Taking Forward multilateral nuclear disarmament negotiations

India attaches the highest priority to nuclear disarmament and share the with the cosponsors the objective of taking forward multilateral nuclear disarmament negotiations. However we have abstained on this resolution for the following reasons.

Disarmament is a charter responsibility of the UNGA. In exercise of this responsibility the First Special Session on Disarmament established the disarmament machinery with the CD as the single multilateral disarmament negotiating forum. Nuclear Disarmament continues to be on the CD's Agenda. We believe that this OEWG established outside the CD with an unclear mandate and with the GA Rules of Procedure may not lead to an inclusive process or productive outcomes that would advance prospects for nuclear disarmament. 

Given the divisive nature of the current nuclear disarmament discourse, there is urgent need for genuine dialogue involving all member states. We would hope that the co-sponsors would be open to such a dialogue and that would be reflected in the approach to the drafting of such resolutions.

L.23:  Follow up to nuclear disarmament obligations agreed to at the 1995, 2000 and 2010 Review Conferences of the NPT

India has abstained on the resolution as a whole. With reference to PP6 of the resolution, India’s position with regard to the NPT is well-known. There is no question of India joining the NPT as a non-nuclear weapon state.

L.26: United action towards the total elimination of nuclear weapons

India remains committed to the goal of global, verifiable and non-discriminatory nuclear disarmament in a time-bound framework. We have stressed the need for a step by step process underwritten by a universal commitment and an agreed multilateral framework for achieving global and non-discriminatory nuclear disarmament.  In substantive terms, the resolution falls short of this objective.

India has voted against OP 5 as we cannot accept the call to accede to the Treaty on the Non Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons as a non-nuclear-weapon State. India’s position on the NPT is well-known. There is no question of India joining the NPT as a non-nuclear weapon state. Nuclear weapons are an integral part of India's national security and will remain so, pending non-discriminatory and global nuclear disarmament.

As India supports the commencement of negotiations on an FMCT in the Conference on Disarmament, the question of a moratorium on the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons does not arise. We have therefore abstained on OP 15. India has also abstained on OP 19. The concept of a Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement is applicable only to non-nuclear weapon states, party to the NPT. India has concluded an India-Specific Safeguards Agreement with the IAEA and signed and ratified a Protocol additional to that agreement.

As we mark the 70th anniversary of the UN, we acknowledge the leading role that Japan, the lead sponsor of this resolution, has played in promoting nuclear disarmament efforts.

L.34: Conventional arms control at the regional and sub regional levels

India has voted against the resolution contained in document L.34 titled “Conventional arms control at the regional and sub-regional levels” and its OP2 which requests the Conference on Disarmament to consider the formulation of principles that can serve as a framework for regional agreements on conventional arms control.

The Conference, as the single multilateral disarmament negotiating forum, has a vocation of negotiating disarmament instruments of global application. In 1993, the UN Disarmament Commission had, by consensus, adopted guidelines and recommendations for regional disarmament. There is no need, therefore, for the Conference on Disarmament to engage itself in formulating principles on the same subject at a time when it has several other priority issues on its agenda.  

Further, we believe that the security concerns of States extend beyond narrowly defined regions. Consequently, the notion of preservation of a balance in defence capabilities in the regional or sub-regional context is unrealistic and unacceptable to our delegation.

EOV on L37 "Humanitarian Consequences of Nuclear Weapons"

India has voted in favor of this resolution consistent with its participation in the three meetings in Oslo, Nayarit and Vienna on the humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons.  Our participation in these meetings was premised on the shared concern on the serious threat to the survival of humankind that could be posed by the use of nuclear weapons  and in the hope of gaining international  support  for increased restraints on use of such weapons and thus correct an imbalance in the international legal discourse that has focused almost exclusively on restraints on possession.

Operative Paragraph 1 of this resolution stresses that it is in the interest of the very survival of humanity that nuclear weapons are never used again, under any circumstances.

Operative paragraph 1 of L21 of the resolution on the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use of Nuclear Weapons calls on the Conference on Disarmament to commence negotiations on an international convention prohibiting the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons, under any circumstances.

L21 is one of the most long standing resolutions in this Committee anchored firmly in the humanitarian tradition of nuclear disarmament. However, for reasons that are difficult to understand, some of the very states that are in the fore front of the humanitarian discourse and are the lead sponsors of L37 have in the past voted against the resolution on the Convention on the Prohibition of Use of Nuclear Weapons this year contained in L21.

We appeal to these states to reconsider their position and narrow the credibility gap between precept and practice that is difficult to ignore. 

L38 "Humanitarian Pledge for the Prohibition and Elimination of Nuclear Weapons

India has abstained on resolution contained in L38. Though India participated in the three Conferences in Oslo, Nayarit and Vienna on the humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons, we do not see the Humanitarian Pledge as an agreed outcome of these meetings.       

India shares the concerns on the serious threat to the survival of humankind posed by the use of nuclear weapons. India has been unwavering in its commitment to universal, non-discriminatory and verifiable nuclear disarmament. As such we are in agreement with the objective of this resolution for the complete prohibition and elimination of nuclear weapons.

India has also supported some of the interim measures mentioned in the resolution to reduce nuclear risks pending the total elimination of nuclear weapons, which in fact are reflected in a separate resolution sponsored by India on Reducing Nuclear Dangers contained in L20.        

However, we have not joined the Humanitarian Pledge and have abstained on this resolution. There are inherent dangers in proposals that further fragment the disarmament agenda or splinter the established disarmament machinery.        

As has been the case with Biological and Chemical Weapons, increasing restraints on use of nuclear weapons could contribute to the progressive de-legitimization of nuclear weapons - an essential step for their eventual elimination. The resolution is silent on this aspect.        

Further, the  Pledge falls short of the requirements of a Comprehensive Nuclear Weapons Convention, which in addition to prohibition and elimination also includes verification. International verification will be essential to the global elimination of nuclear weapons just as it has been in the case of the CWC.     

When nuclear weapons are so deeply entrenched in security policies, seeking a short-cut through the stigmatization of nuclear weapons, without reducing their role and addressing the important aspects of verification, provides an illusion of progress rather than a realistic contribution to nuclear disarmament and the complete elimination of nuclear weapons. 

Finally, there appears to be a credibility gap in the voting pattern of some of the key sponsors of this resolution with regard to some of the other resolutions in this Committee, in particular L 20 and L21. This credibility gap has to go.

L40 Ethical Imperatives for a Nuclear Weapon Free World    

India has attached particular importance to L40 - a  resolution tabled for the first time by South Africa highlighting the ethical dimension of nuclear disarmament. We recall our support for a number of the previous proposals and resolutions mentioned in this resolution, including the first resolution of the UNGA in 1946 and the Final Document of SSOD I. In fact this resolution is a reminder of the long struggle for nuclear disarmament that has been waged in the UNGA and outside in which India has played a leading role, along with other NAM states.

India agrees with several provisions of this resolution, in particular its acknowledgement that nuclear disarmament is a global public good of the highest order. We support the ICJ Advisory Opinion, that there exists a legal obligation to pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international control. In this regard India has once again cosponsored the relevant resolution tabled by Malaysia contained in L51 and has supported the NAM proposal for the commencement of negotiations on a Comprehensive Nuclear Weapons Convention in the CD.

Since the dawn of the nuclear age, the use of nuclear weapons have posed a most serious threat to the survival of humanity and the continuation of civilization . As such they pose ethical and moral dilemmas of a fundamental nature - which must inform consideration by the international community on all matters relating to nuclear weapons and on nuclear disarmament. Nuclear weapons have been entrenched in the security policies of a number of states, whose total population now exceeds those that do not.

The  global elimination of nuclear weapons will require progressive steps of reduction of their military utility, reduction of their role in security policies and a universal commitment with a global and non-discriminatory multilateral framework for nuclear disarmament.  Until that stage is accomplished by common agreement, reflected in specific international legal instruments, questions relating to the immorality of nuclear weapons have to be balanced by the sovereign responsibility of states to protect their people in a nuclearized global order put together on the pillars of nuclear deterrence.  India's nuclear doctrine of credible minimum deterrence,  with a no-first use posture,  seeks to strike this very balance.

The illegality of nuclear weapons cannot just be a matter of opinio juris; it is necessary for the international community to negotiate and conclude  specific legal instruments for that purpose. India has proposed a Convention on the Prohibition of  Use of Nuclear Weapons and has supported a Comprehensive Nuclear Weapons Convention. We remain prepared to take forward these proposals in the Conference on Disarmament.

The moral and ethical argument complements the legal order but cannot substitute for it. Since the resolution is not clear as to the correlation between means and ends and hence its ability to take forward the nuclear disarmament discourse in an inclusive and purposeful manner, India has decided to abstain on this resolution. India remains open to further discussions with its sponsors in the future.

L.41- Towards a nuclear-weapon-free world: accelerating the implementation of nuclear disarmament commitments

India remains committed to the goal of complete elimination of nuclear weapons. We are concerned about the threat to humanity posed by the continued existence of nuclear weapons and their possible use or threat of use. India also shares the view that nuclear disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation are mutually reinforcing. We continue to support a time-bound programme for global, verifiable and non-discriminatory nuclear disarmament.

We have voted against the draft resolution L 41 as well as its OP13 since India cannot accept the call to accede to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons as a non-nuclear-weapon State. In urging India to accede to NPT, “promptly and without conditions,” the draft resolution negates the rules of customary international law, as enshrined in the Vienna Law of Treaties, which provides that a State’s acceptance, ratification or accession to a treaty is based on the principle of free consent. India’s position on the NPT is well-known. There is no question of India joining the NPT as a non-nuclear weapon state. Nuclear weapons are an integral part of India's national security and will remain so, pending global, verifiable and non-discriminatory nuclear disarmament.

L.44  Nuclear Disarmament

India attaches the highest priority to nuclear disarmament. India shares the main objective of this resolution which is the complete elimination of nuclear weapons with a specified framework of time.

We have been constrained to abstain on the resolution L.44 because of certain references to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons on which India’s position is well known.

However, our vote should not be seen as opposition to other provisions of the resolution, which we believe are consistent with NAM as well as India’s national positions on nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. These provisions include the reference to SSOD I Final document, NAM summit statements, ICJ advisory opinion, objective of the elimination of nuclear weapons with a specified framework of time, the role and work of the CD, including the establishment of an ad hoc committee on nuclear disarmament in the CD as the highest priority, reference to CD/1999 consisting of the proposal of the Group of 21 for a Comprehensive Nuclear Weapons Convention, the negotiation of an FMCT in the CD on the basis of the Shannon mandate as well as the call for convening an international conference on nuclear disarmament in all its aspects at an early date to identify and deal with concrete measures of nuclear disarmament. We compliment Myanmar for retaining vital principled positions in this resolution which are supported by a vast majority of countries.

L.47 : No First Placement of Weapons in Outer Space

India has voted in favour of L.47 regarding No First Placement of Weapons in Outer Space.

As a major space faring nation, India has vital developmental and security interests in space. The resolution states that the legal regime applicable to outer space needs to be consolidated and reinforced. India supports this objective and the strengthening of the international legal regime to protect and preserve access to space for all and to prevent without exceptions, the weaponization of outer space. We support the substantive consideration of PAROS in the CD, along with other proposals that have been tabled. While not a substitute for legally binding instruments, TCBMs can play a useful and complementary role. Discussions on a draft International Code of Conduct for Outer Space Activities should be inclusive, both in process and substance, to ensure a product of universal acceptance and anchored in the UN. We see the No First Placement of weapons in outer space as only an interim step and not a substitute for concluding substantive legal measures to ensure the prevention of an arms race in outer space, which should continue to be a priority for the international community.

L.48 Transparency and Confidence Building Measures in Outer Space Activities

India has joined the consensus on L.48 consistent with its position that while not a substitute for legally binding instruments, TCBMs can play a useful and complementary role. We regret that India was not included in the Group of Governmental Experts convened by the Secretary General which submitted its report contained in A/68/189 in 2013. In our view, a GGE with more inclusive participation of all relevant space faring nations would have ensured a more balanced and coherent report, thus making an effective and meaningful contribution to international efforts with respect to Outer Space activities.

L.50: Implementation of the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-personnel Mines and on Their Destruction

India supports the vision of a world free of anti-personnel landmines and is committed to their eventual elimination. The availability of militarily effective alternative technologies that can perform, cost-effectively, the legitimate defensive role of anti-personnel landmines will considerably facilitate the goal of the complete elimination of anti-personnel mines.

India is a High Contracting Party to Amended Protocol II of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons which enshrines the approach of taking into account the legitimate defence requirements of States, especially those with long borders. India has fulfilled its obligations under AP-II including inter alia stopping the production of non-detectable mines as well as rendering all our anti-personnel mines detectable. India is observing a moratorium on the export and transfer of anti-personnel landmines.

We have taken a number of measures to address humanitarian concerns arising from the use of anti-personnel landmines in accordance with international humanitarian law. India remains committed to increased international cooperation and assistance for mine clearance and rehabilitation of mine-victims and is willing to contribute technical assistance and expertise to this end.

India participated as observer in the Third Review Conference of the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-personnel Mines and on Their Destruction held in Maputo on 23-27 June 2014.

L52 Rev 1  Universal Declaration on the Achievement of a Nuclear Weapon Free World.

India appreciates the initiative of Kazakhstan to table resolution contained in L52 Rev1 which includes an Universal Declaration on the Achievement of a Nuclear Weapon Free World.

At a time when the international nuclear disarmament agenda has become deeply divisive, this resolution seeks to build common ground on certain basic issues drawn from the Final Document of SSOD I and the ICJ Advisory Opinion of 1996. Further while it refers to the NPT it is not restricted to the framework of that Treaty. Since nuclear disarmament is a concern for all states, non nuclear as well as states possessing nuclear weapons, the appropriate scope is a Universal Declaration, which we hope will re-energize international efforts for nuclear disarmament and the total elimination of nuclear weapons.

With respect to para 4 of the Annex containing the Universal Declaration, we recall the unanimous opinion of the ICJ in 1996 that 'a threat or use nuclear weapons should also be compatible with the requirements of the international law applicable to armed conflict , particularly those of the principles and rules of international humanitarian law, as well as specific obligations under treaties and other undertakings which expressly deal with nuclear weapons.' Since no such explicit prohibition  exists, India has proposed the conclusion of a Convention on the Prohibition of Use of Nuclear Weapons. Discussions on the Declaration would therefore have to be taken forward keeping this in view. Further, the apparent divergences in approaches as reflected in paras 4 and 6 of the Universal Declaration need to be addressed in future discussions.

Notwithstanding these issues, India has voted in favour of the resolution as an important contribution to the international discourse on nuclear disarmament and the complete elimination of nuclear weapons.

It is evident from the voting on this resolution that India was the only State possessing nuclear weapons to vote in favour of the resolution.

L.54:The Arms Trade Treaty

India has strong and effective national export controls with respect to export of defense items. During the negotiations of the ATT, India had raised concerns on a number of gaps that remained in the final text. It remains to be seen if the entry into force of the Treaty will have a meaningful impact on the ground. India continues to keep under review the ATT from the perspective of our defence, security and foreign policy interests. We have therefore abstained on the draft resolution contained in L.54.

L55: African Nuclear Weapon Free Zone Treaty

India respects the sovereign choice of non-nuclear weapon states to establish nuclear-weapon-free-zones on the basis of arrangements freely arrived at among the states of the region concerned. This principle is consistent with the provisions of SSOD-I and the 1999 UNDC Guidelines.

India enjoys friendly and mutually beneficial relations with countries of the African continent and has just hosted a Summit meeting with all countries from Africa. India shares and supports African aspirations for enhancing the region’s well-being and security. We respect the sovereign choice of States Parties to the Pelindaba Treaty and welcome the successful entry into force of the Treaty. As a nuclear weapon state, India conveys its unambiguous assurance that it will respect the status of the African Nuclear Weapon Free Zone.

L.58: Treaty on the South-East Asia Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone (Bangkok Treaty)

India has joined in the adoption of the text of L.58 without a vote. India respects the sovereign choice of non-nuclear weapon states to establish NWFZs on the basis of arrangements freely arrived at among the States of the region concerned. This principle is consistent with the provisions of SSOD I as well as the 1999 UNDC guidelines, referred to in the resolution.

India enjoys friendly and productive relations with all countries of the South East Asian region. We respect the sovereign choice of States Parties to the Bangkok Treaty. As a nuclear weapon state, India has conveyed an unambiguous assurance that it will respect the status of the South-East Asia Nuclear Weapon Free Zone.